Jump to content
3./JG15_HansPhilipp

Arado AR 234 as a Collector's plane.

Arado AR 234 as a Collector's plane.  

95 members have voted

  1. 1. Does you would like to have Arado Ar 234 as a Collector's plane for Battle of Bodenplatte?

    • Yes, it will certainly be a great addition to Bodenplatte.
      74
    • No, it won't aggregate anything to Bodenplatte.
      21


Recommended Posts

9 minutes ago, 3./JG15_HansPhilipp said:

We already have enough 109's.

I don't think that another 109 as a CP will aggregate to BoB in overall.

 

I don't think that the real Hans Philipp would say such a thing. 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

The RAF B. Command Managed, whatever the reasons were.., was able to fly more sorties, than your small list of "arado" sorties in 5 months. What ever the reasons were is not important. It's still not a lot, ur Little list, and soooo Tiny compared to the fighter sorties.

Single engine fighter/-Bombers were focused by the Industry. Not Bombers. It's fine when you fly ur Bombers till 1943. But from there. German Air force had other Problems and a other Focus with their Abfangjägernotprogramm.

 

What is the percentage of Luftwaffe sorties to westen allied sorties?

 

Nicht alles was hinkt ist ein Vergleich.

 

15 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

An Allied Pilot if he sees an enemy, then most likley a Fw 190, Bf 109, some heavy Twin engine fighter, but not a freaking arado.

 

Duh. Except for those that actually saw an Arado.

The Arado is the technologically WAY more interesting airplane, hence it is more intersting to depict it in a flight simulation.

People don't get aroused by another 109 with a different strain of the plague.

 

15 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

But from there. German Air force had other Problems and a other Focus with their Abfangjägernotprogramm. 

 

Which..kinda..failed.

Like most german programs - be it useful or useless.

 

15 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

But yeah at some Point IL2 doesn't act so serious About history. That's why we have the Mc202 and P40 over Moscow 41. Or LaGG with 23mm. 

So there is your HOPE that they will make it...till then you can search your Information About it's flight Quality. I haven't found a Thing.

 

We had an Ar 234 AND a Do 335 in IL-2 1946.

And guess what: It actually didn't suck.

 

15 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

A Nation has to defend themselves with MAINLY fighters against many Bombers, their most important Thing is to have fighters.

 

Nope.

If you only have fighters, you can't do anything, except defend your airspace when the enemy is already there. A concept which sucks balls.

Your airspace is best defended above the enemy's bomber airbases, which the teeny-weeny 109 just couldn't do. You'll need force-projection capability to reliably defend yourself.

The Luftwaffe suffered partially because it didn't have strategical outreach from early on. And it never really did at all.

That's because Bomber B never caught on and because general Wever thought it was cool to take off with a gust-lock installed. But that's totally different story altogether.

 

16 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Listen to the interview, the Translation if you don't speak german that i hardly assume(another german wannabe with pseudo Jagdgeschwader tags)

 

You mean like "3./J88"?

What's going on with that "88" thing anyway?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Schon so verblendet und indoktriniert, dass man ein Geschwader nicht erkennt? Eine simple Google Arbeit wäre das gewesen... aber der Deutsche Mann im Jahre 2018 erkennt eher die 88.

 

I was actually just pulling your leg - and guess what, It worked.

J88 isn't really the greatest choice for a virtual unit with it's Legion Condor heritage.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Des Weiteren ist das obere, der Teil mit "german wannabe pseudo jg" auf den Franzosen bezogen, der sich einen deutschen Namen zugelegt hat bezogen, worauf ich zuerst dachte er würde "deutsch" verstehen, was sich aber herausstellte, dass er es nicht tut und nur gerne einer wäre oder Nationen-Roleplay betreibt. Wer möchte denn nicht Deutscher sein? :D

 

You should see a doctor.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Auch zu sagen der Vergleich hinkt, Ahja. Wieso sollte dieser hinken. Eine Nation die sich gegen feindliche Bomberverbände schützen muss. Welche Nation das wohl sein kann? Puh, kommen einige in Frage. Ok, wieso hinkt der Vergleich jetzt? Weil ich Zwei Situationen Vergleiche, die der Briten 1940? Und die der Luftwaffe ende 44/45? Deswegen werden Vergleiche aufgestellt? Um vielleicht mal Unterschiede rauszufiltern und dann merkt man, oh einige Gemeinsamkeiten sind schon vorhanden, oh vielleicht hinkt der Vergleich doch nicht so wie anfangs behauptet?

 

The strategic situation between Britain in 1940 and Germany in 1945 couldn't be more different.

Namely because the Luftwaffe was incapable of crumbling Britain. The RAF couldn't kill Germany either, but they had a big brother with an even bigger stick.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Eine Nation mit über 200 Flugfähigen Bombern die aber auf ihre Jagdwaffe setzt um der Gefahr der Bomber Einhalt zu gebieten. Das könnte England aber auch Deutschland sein, korrekt. Die jeweiligen Bomber Flotten, ob das KG76 mit ihren Arados oder das Royal Bomber Command, mussten Ziele anfliegen die unter feindlicher Lufthochheit lagen. Hingegen war das Royal Bomber Command weniger unter Zeitdruck und Treibstoffmangel als das KG76, dessen Land kurz vor der Niederlage stand. Trotzdem haben BEIDE Nationen vermehrt auf ihre Jagdwaffe gesetzt, die Engländer auf ihre Spitfires und Hurricanes und die Luftwaffe auf ihre späteren 109er und 190er, wie im sehr kleinem Ausmaß die 262er.

 

Britain had a decisive advantage in 1940. It was namely the incapability of Germany to pull off strategic operations.

Jets didn't have too much trouble with gas (the jet fuel was relatively easily available). It was aircrew, logistics and a general lack of experience with jets that made them suffer. And the omni-presence of allied fighters waiting to kick some butt.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Trotzdem haben BEIDE Nationen vermehrt auf ihre Jagdwaffe gesetzt, die Engländer auf ihre Spitfires und Hurricanes und die Luftwaffe auf ihre späteren 109er und 190er, wie im sehr kleinem Ausmaß die 262er. BEIDE mussten in Luftraum eindringen das feindlicher Lufthoheit unterliegt, der Unterschied der Luftwaffe zum Royal Bomber Command ist, dass Allierte Jäger auch in der Lage waren die Liegeplätze der Bomber anzugreifen. Die englischen Bomber hingegen langsam sind und die Arados schnell im Vergleich zu ihren Feinden.

 

Britain could go for a war of attrition in 1940. Germany couldn't. They were already bleeding heavily from their operations gainst their continental neighbours.

Britain also did have the benefit of being opposed by an enemy who couldn't project airpower anywhere anytime. The locus of fighters in the sutheast was a totally different affair than defending Germany from 1943 onwards.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

In 5 Monaten wo man jederzeit, jeden Tag starten sollte um feindl. Bodentruppen anzugreifen, auszubremsen oder Verwirrung zu stiften. Es auf so wenige Einsätze bringt, zeigt doch nur wie oft die Maschinen "grounded" waren. Klar die Jäger der Luftwaffe waren es auch oft genug, die bringen es trotzdem mit ihren G10ern, K4ern, G14ern, A8ern, D9ern auf viel viel mehr Einsätze als die ollen Düsenbombern, dessen Anteil an ausgebildeter Besatzung sowieso verschwindend gering war.

 

Especially during the timeframe of Bodenplatte, this is actually not the case.

The larger number of prop-fighter operations is purely down to the numbers. A major part is the allied CAPs sitting above the airfields and (!) weather grounding operations.

Luftwaffe IFR-training was lacking big deal behind the allies. In 1944, most blind-flying schools were gone, so bomber-pilots (the attrition-rate was murderous) didn't know jack-sheet about IFR-flying.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Ein Düsenbomber einfügen der kaum Einsätze sah, wie soll das Online bzw. im Singleplayer ablaufen. Jede 5. oder von mir aus 10. Maschine die man sieht ne Arado die da rumdüst, als würde der 2. Weltkrieg nur von Düsenbombern und ein paar Propeller Flieger geführt? Eine Singleplayer Kampagne mit dem Düsenbomber? Dann fliegt man 20 Missionen und schon wars das?

 

A clever mission-bulder won't have an issue with that.

A well done campaign with 20 missions ain't half bad.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Klar man sollte nicht so pingelig wie ich sein im historischen Aspekt, aber alles was darüber geht ist einfach nur noch ein abgeschwächtes War Thunder. Wenn jeder Depp mit der Arado 234 im Multiplayer rumdüst.

 

That's not how it works.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Klar die 109G10 würde sich wahrscheinlich weniger verkaufen als die Arado. Wäre aber mit einem besseren Flugmodel versehen weil die Daten dafür nun mal da sind, im Vergleich zur Arado.

 

That's incorrect. There's sufficient data around to model the Arado.

 

2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Wo um Himmels willen will man bitte qualitative Flugdaten herbekommen, ich habe bis jetzt noch keine Gefunden. Ein Flugmodel zu erstellen ist alles andere als einfach und erfordert einiges. Höchstgeschwindigkeit an Deck, auf 500m, auf 1000m - das gleiche Spiel dann bis zur max. Höhe. Wie lange dauert es auf höchst Geschw. der jeweiligen Höhen zu kommen in der Arado. Wie lange braucht sie um zu kurven. Das dann auch auf den jew. Höhen. Sturzgeschwindigkeit, Sturzbeschleunigung ,das auch auf den jew. Höhen.

 

It's just physics.

We also only have single data-points for most warbirds. Most of the data is interpolated or extrapolated.

With a performance-variation of about 5% between airframes of the same make and model, you don't have to be spot on with the data.

 

Edited by Bremspropeller
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Well but it doesn't make any sense to discuss anymore. It's not convincing People anymore at this Point.

It's more like a bunch of People, mostly Arado fanboys who think that 40 sorties in 5 Months is a lot or history shouldn't be taken as serious VS my opinion that a british/american or russian fighter Pilot rather would see IF he sees an enemy, then it would be a Fw190 or a Messerschmitt Bf 109 and NOT an Arado.

We are moving in Cycles so i will stop the discussion Right here.

 

You are right it doesn't make any sense to discuss anymore.

Basically what you are defending so far is that, as far as late war is concerned, the only planes that should ever be developped in the future of IL2 are more and more 109s and 190s variants. 

 

Just have a look here :

 

Out of 200 answers, the tendency is that the majority of people are much less interested by german fighter variants than by iconic attack planes like the Arado or the 410. 

No wonders that 90% of people disagree with you and that you won't convince anyone no matter how hard you try. If this serie wants to live, it has to walk the same path as the old Il2 and offer a wide variety of planes to a higher fidelity standard. Hopefuly the devs aren't sharing your point of view, or else they would have gone bankrupt in no time.

 

The purpose of a flight sim is to offer a flight and fight experience on a diversity of planes to the highest fidelity level.

Nobody aside you and a few other probably calling themselves "purists" prefer to strip down entertainment for uniformity, having no problem to play the regular  Mustang vs Dora engagement over and over again, for the sake of statistics, because "An Allied Pilot if he sees an enemy, then most likley it's a Fw 190 or Bf 109"

 

Edited by F/JG300_Gruber
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why he doesn't it simply accept that the poll is about a CP AND if he and other users don't like it, just don't buy it?

 

"2 hours ago, [3./J88]PikAss said:

Well but it doesn't make any sense to discuss anymore..."

 

Thank you Sr!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

I would pay for another 109.

 

We would need two 😎

 

G-10 and G14/AS were used in significant numbers in the timeframe 9/44-4/45 and on 1st  January 45 especially.

 

Since both more ore less look the same externally (roughly like the K4) and only differ by engine and other technical features, it might be possible to have them at some point.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

I can already see the chartmonkey-fest of people requesting the Erla G-10 over another production-type.

The thread will deveop this way: By the third reply, "K-4 and 1.98ata" will be mentioned and the thread won't make it to page two without "25lbs boost" coming up :)

 

Maybe tying those two versions (G-10 and G-14/AS) up into a special "late 109s" pack woud make sense. Put in a thrird 109 version (maybe a G-6 with the erla-hood and the large tail) and you'd have a very nice deal on your hand. Another "third" option could be a hi-alt version with a PX-cabin and GM-1 injection (say a G-1 or G-5).

Just thinking sim-experience wise...

 

Edited by Bremspropeller
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bremspropeller said:

I can already see the chartmonkey-fest of people requesting the Erla G-10 over another production-type.

 

And what about the Sonderkommando modification? If they truly want all possible variants then the Elbe shouldn't be overlooked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Ehret said:

 

And what about the Sonderkommando modification? If they truly want all possible variants then the Elbe shouldn't be overlooked.

 

I’d love to smash my Bf-109 into a B-24’s fuselage. But until we actually get the viermots to ram, I don’t think there’s any point to having to Sonderkommando Elbe modifications.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All though Elbe command had a few successes they where deemed less effective . Lack of pilots planes and fuel 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2018 at 9:43 AM, Pb_Cybermat47 said:

 

I’d love to smash my Bf-109 into a B-24’s fuselage. But until we actually get the viermots to ram, I don’t think there’s any point to having to Sonderkommando Elbe modifications.

 

If you have read any of Sonderkommando Elbe's history, there was a more technical approach than just smashing into a B-24's fuselage.

I'll agree that approaching a large bomber and hitting it where you want to so you can bring it down is not an easy or exact science, especially when you are at high closure speeds, but remember, the idea was 'not' to kill yourself in the process, but to survive the impact and parachute to safety.

That way you can go up and do it again.

Anyway, I'll leave you to research it... it certainly was not a 'Kamikaze' outfit  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×